|
|
On September 13 2012 13:35 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 13:19 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 13 2012 13:05 dacimvrl wrote:On September 13 2012 13:01 m0ck wrote:On September 13 2012 12:58 dacimvrl wrote:On September 13 2012 12:43 AlgeriaT wrote:On September 13 2012 12:29 FXOBoSs wrote:
I didn't read all the posts. But just going to go over a few things in this situation.
Firstly, a 10 yr non competition clause would never be able to be executed. Its kind of a joke really. 2 years is hard enough to enforce. Non comp, is standard but usually only is enforced if you steal someones clients.
Preventing someone from building a game house? Did you invent the gaming house mentality? Brb, sending the Koreans to sue you for stealing their ideas.. Please note I am being sarcastic.
The contract is a typical eastern european contract (no racism emplied). Its a power culture, and the contract is there to show power. Its normal, hell I do business there and I would probably have a contract similar (not so gross) that shows my power over the project.
The problem that MoW has failed to see is that they are not catering to polish people, but rather the world is seeing them. I know it doesn't sound exactly right, but their contracts should be written under US law. In an American way. Why? Because the majority of the viewers and players will be able to abide by that and will understand it better and won't take it as threatening. Cultural mistake there.
The cost of staying there + the streaming income. Another big joke. IF you are going to take income from someone you don't charge them margin on the cost to live there imo. Because your money is made from the fact they are streaming for you. 3-5 hours is do-able, but it doesn't achieve what the house was hyping itself up to be. So pick a side. Where are you going to make the money? From the stream? Or from the house? Double dipping something like that is kinda lame. I understand some people might be staying for free, so streaming income is probably the best option. The cost of things in poland already show you will turn a profit from the project regardless over time.
The other issue is, is it going to become a giant frat house with that much streaming going on? Correct answer, yes. Taking 5 hours out of a practice schedule in a day is one of the most insanely terrible things to do to someone who is trying to get better by gaming. Seriously, streaming saps energy (I stream to 20 viewers and by the end of it [3hours] I am always exhausted). So again, you have to pick a side, do you want to be a giant frat house that makes kids think everyone is a super star, or do you want people to become superstars by winning touranments?
From what I see, a whole bunch of stuff was really not planned or thought about before launching. Possibly the rush to make money was there I'm not sure. But a complete revamp of the model needs to occur immediately now, incase someone is fooled into thinking they will actually get better in a streaming environment. Given the posts by LgNkarmy and Snute who have both lived at the MoW house, it seems that - while what you say may be true - such a revamp is already underway, that MoW are learning from their mistakes and that they in fact are not malicious in their intent. Did you read these posts? I ask because I fear that your post (given your status in the community) may add significantly to a bonfire of hate based purely on hearsay from one evicted player and possibly lead to an undue mailbombing of sponsors, as already instigated by several trolls/overly aggressive posters in this thread. I disagree with you. In my opinion, it's only fair if we can hear both sides of the story and speculation. It doesn't even matter if revisions to the contract or whatever is underway. It does not change anything in Fuzer's situation, at all. In that regard, it does not concern this case in anyway. Oh, and to be honest, Snute's post isn't even remotely an insight. Every other line, he says, "I am not taking sides", and yet every other line he praises MoW/bashes Fuzer. He's a pro player, he benefited from the team house. Do you naively believe MoW would treat a random guy with the same leniency and respect as a pro player? So, posts from former players carry no value. Only rampant speculation from people outside the situation does. Makes sense. I am sorry, that's an over-generalization. Do you naively believe MoW would treat a random guy with the same leniency and respect as a pro player? And from what I've read from FXOBoss, I wouldn't denounce his speculation as rampant. Fuzer is significantly better than LgNKarmy or whatever his name is, who upon entering the MoW I'm not positive if he was even mid masters on NA. On September 13 2012 13:06 Inori wrote:On September 13 2012 08:23 MinistryOfWin wrote:
Streaming time - quote from the contract: 150 hours per month, unless having a series of training events or trips to StarCraft II tournaments. We are all humans, we are not forcing the players to stream 4 hours a day. I'm sure this was brought up before, but this is too good to pass. 168 hours/month is considered full time working hours. You're asking for relatively large monthly payment and on top of that make the guy work pretty much full time with no benefits like health insurance? How can anybody take this seriously? How could anybody agree to these bs terms? Few comments/questions. 1. If you don't like it, don't go? Don't agree to the terms? 2. Does Poland not have free healthcare, out of curiosity? 3. They aren't employees, they'd are simply "leasing" out the facilities in a contract and are paying a commission to the MoW for its use. This is not uncommon in many areas. In Europe (or Poland specifically), do companies typically offer benefits beyond pay for temporary workers, contractors, commission based agents, or for permissive use of leased equipment? They would not fall under the definition of an employee, which generally has an indefinite period of employment unless terminated by a party, has to report to a supervisor on how they perform the task (rather than simply being required to complete the task, which is a contractor). Although in this specific scenario I guess there are some arguments they could be considered employees (as MoW does provide equipment/tool). 4. Oh shit. The requirement included weekends? That's a major bust. How do the local labor laws in Poland (more of a question to anyone) respond to contract "work" that requires 7 days a week of work? I know in the U.S. if you're required to work 7 days, regardless of how many hours your work each individual day, it counts as overtime, IF you're an employee. To 1. : Didn't you read all the terms weren't revealed? And I'm not sure why you're okay with shit terms as long as no one goes there. That's like having every single tournament have no prizes and if you don't like it you don't play in them. The scene would die. Also I'm pretty sure that making people work 150 hours a month for free is illegal as well but...
1. Except all the terms would have been revealed if they saw the contract. Ask for the contract before, you see all the terms. It's not as if the contract was altered, and the MoW was acting in bad faith.
2. Yes, that's fine. Am I not allowed to host a tournament of my own with no prize money? lmao. Are you going to stop me from doing so? You're right, no one will care for my tournament if it happens, so I have no incentive to do it. But apparently there is a demand for MoW's terms - so your point is irrelevant.
3. Contract law is different than employment. However, to insinuate it's free is preposterous. MoW could claim they are giving a discount on rent from market value had no streaming revenue been taken, they are providing state of the art equipment, housekeeping services, food (including one hot meal), workout equipment, a psychiatrist or whatever they are providing, etc. To continue to show why that's such a stupid assessment, they are taking a commission for use of services and the ability to participate in the twitch.tv revenue plan.
If I want to go sell See's Candy chocolate bars, See's Candy can provide me with said chocolate bars, pay me absolutely nothing for my time spent trying to sell them, and still take a commission for what I sell. In fact, they could charge me a flat fee if they wanted to, such as $200 for a box of chocolate bars with a market value of $400, and still take a 15% commission ($60) for what I sold. It's my choice if I want to do it or not.
|
On September 13 2012 14:09 nath wrote:
as an american that has done a lot of business with eastern europe (software industry) their contracts are scary as hell/VERY 'power' emphasized...i think other countries are far worse than poland usually. totally vouch for boss' position.
True, it is very common here, to intimidate people with contract clauses. Basically it is all about "KNOW YOUR PLACE WORM I RULE HERE" stuff. On the one hand you dont have to sign such contract, on the other most of those are as such, effectively giving you no choice.
|
SO i was sleeping since MoW said the statement will be released within 2 hours. So please someone could get me up to date? Has the statement been release already?
|
On September 13 2012 14:13 chindy wrote:
SO i was sleeping since MoW said the statement will be released within 2 hours. So please someone could get me up to date? Has the statement been release already?
Personally I don't think it qualifies as a statement. If you saw the link at the top and read the paragraph (also contains 2 interviews) by MoW, that is their supposed statement. But it's not really one if you ask me. They would have looked better if they pretended they weren't even aware of the issue and released a delayed statement.
|
Wow, too many people are taking this way out of proportion.
Guys, don't take a sentence out of the blue and make assumptions out of it. This ain't even a day old and you guys are expecting the world.
Let it rest and see what both parties have to say after things have settled.
|
On September 13 2012 13:35 Shikyo wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 13:19 FabledIntegral wrote:On September 13 2012 13:05 dacimvrl wrote:On September 13 2012 13:01 m0ck wrote:On September 13 2012 12:58 dacimvrl wrote:On September 13 2012 12:43 AlgeriaT wrote:On September 13 2012 12:29 FXOBoSs wrote:
I didn't read all the posts. But just going to go over a few things in this situation.
Firstly, a 10 yr non competition clause would never be able to be executed. Its kind of a joke really. 2 years is hard enough to enforce. Non comp, is standard but usually only is enforced if you steal someones clients.
Preventing someone from building a game house? Did you invent the gaming house mentality? Brb, sending the Koreans to sue you for stealing their ideas.. Please note I am being sarcastic.
The contract is a typical eastern european contract (no racism emplied). Its a power culture, and the contract is there to show power. Its normal, hell I do business there and I would probably have a contract similar (not so gross) that shows my power over the project.
The problem that MoW has failed to see is that they are not catering to polish people, but rather the world is seeing them. I know it doesn't sound exactly right, but their contracts should be written under US law. In an American way. Why? Because the majority of the viewers and players will be able to abide by that and will understand it better and won't take it as threatening. Cultural mistake there.
The cost of staying there + the streaming income. Another big joke. IF you are going to take income from someone you don't charge them margin on the cost to live there imo. Because your money is made from the fact they are streaming for you. 3-5 hours is do-able, but it doesn't achieve what the house was hyping itself up to be. So pick a side. Where are you going to make the money? From the stream? Or from the house? Double dipping something like that is kinda lame. I understand some people might be staying for free, so streaming income is probably the best option. The cost of things in poland already show you will turn a profit from the project regardless over time.
The other issue is, is it going to become a giant frat house with that much streaming going on? Correct answer, yes. Taking 5 hours out of a practice schedule in a day is one of the most insanely terrible things to do to someone who is trying to get better by gaming. Seriously, streaming saps energy (I stream to 20 viewers and by the end of it [3hours] I am always exhausted). So again, you have to pick a side, do you want to be a giant frat house that makes kids think everyone is a super star, or do you want people to become superstars by winning touranments?
From what I see, a whole bunch of stuff was really not planned or thought about before launching. Possibly the rush to make money was there I'm not sure. But a complete revamp of the model needs to occur immediately now, incase someone is fooled into thinking they will actually get better in a streaming environment. Given the posts by LgNkarmy and Snute who have both lived at the MoW house, it seems that - while what you say may be true - such a revamp is already underway, that MoW are learning from their mistakes and that they in fact are not malicious in their intent. Did you read these posts? I ask because I fear that your post (given your status in the community) may add significantly to a bonfire of hate based purely on hearsay from one evicted player and possibly lead to an undue mailbombing of sponsors, as already instigated by several trolls/overly aggressive posters in this thread. I disagree with you. In my opinion, it's only fair if we can hear both sides of the story and speculation. It doesn't even matter if revisions to the contract or whatever is underway. It does not change anything in Fuzer's situation, at all. In that regard, it does not concern this case in anyway. Oh, and to be honest, Snute's post isn't even remotely an insight. Every other line, he says, "I am not taking sides", and yet every other line he praises MoW/bashes Fuzer. He's a pro player, he benefited from the team house. Do you naively believe MoW would treat a random guy with the same leniency and respect as a pro player? So, posts from former players carry no value. Only rampant speculation from people outside the situation does. Makes sense. I am sorry, that's an over-generalization. Do you naively believe MoW would treat a random guy with the same leniency and respect as a pro player? And from what I've read from FXOBoss, I wouldn't denounce his speculation as rampant. Fuzer is significantly better than LgNKarmy or whatever his name is, who upon entering the MoW I'm not positive if he was even mid masters on NA. On September 13 2012 13:06 Inori wrote:On September 13 2012 08:23 MinistryOfWin wrote:
Streaming time - quote from the contract: 150 hours per month, unless having a series of training events or trips to StarCraft II tournaments. We are all humans, we are not forcing the players to stream 4 hours a day. I'm sure this was brought up before, but this is too good to pass. 168 hours/month is considered full time working hours. You're asking for relatively large monthly payment and on top of that make the guy work pretty much full time with no benefits like health insurance? How can anybody take this seriously? How could anybody agree to these bs terms? Few comments/questions. 1. If you don't like it, don't go? Don't agree to the terms? 2. Does Poland not have free healthcare, out of curiosity? 3. They aren't employees, they'd are simply "leasing" out the facilities in a contract and are paying a commission to the MoW for its use. This is not uncommon in many areas. In Europe (or Poland specifically), do companies typically offer benefits beyond pay for temporary workers, contractors, commission based agents, or for permissive use of leased equipment? They would not fall under the definition of an employee, which generally has an indefinite period of employment unless terminated by a party, has to report to a supervisor on how they perform the task (rather than simply being required to complete the task, which is a contractor). Although in this specific scenario I guess there are some arguments they could be considered employees (as MoW does provide equipment/tool). 4. Oh shit. The requirement included weekends? That's a major bust. How do the local labor laws in Poland (more of a question to anyone) respond to contract "work" that requires 7 days a week of work? I know in the U.S. if you're required to work 7 days, regardless of how many hours your work each individual day, it counts as overtime, IF you're an employee. To 1. : Didn't you read all the terms weren't revealed? And I'm not sure why you're okay with shit terms as long as no one goes there. That's like having every single tournament have no prizes and if you don't like it you don't play in them. The scene would die. Also I'm pretty sure that making people work 150 hours a month for free is illegal as well but...
Well technically speaking you are paying them money to allow you to work in their house so they can take part of YOUR income. Usually if someone is going to take part of your income where you have to put in 150 hours of work monthly ya better damn be getting some free rooming and possibly board
|
The thing is, in all that drama, MoW doesn't really answer to what Fuzer had to say... which is kinda sad
|
On September 13 2012 14:37 NexCa wrote:
The thing is, in all that drama, MoW doesn't really answer to what Fuzer had to say... which is kinda sad
It's been at most a day. Let's not judge too fast.
|
So gross. I was extremely disappointed with MoW's response, and also in the journalism displayed by ESFI. Seems shady as fuck to me.
|
I had a gut feeling about MoW when it was first announced, it was really obvious there were some hidden motives with the facility. Not surprised about this at all. Also, 15 pages of contract for a person who speaks English as a second language, and refusing to send it to a lawyer because you don't get "proof"? Stay classy MoW, stay classy.
|
This may sound a bit harsh, but when you have experience with business and Europe in general, this was already very weird when it was first announced. People moving from The Netherlands, Finland etc. to play a game on the internet from a place in Poland.... Makes absolutely no sense at all.
|
On September 13 2012 14:53 Chicodog wrote:
This may sound a bit harsh, but when you have experience with business and Europe in general, this was already very weird when it was first announced. People moving from The Netherlands, Finland etc. to play a game on the internet from a place in Poland.... Makes absolutely no sense at all.
Thats the power of eSports and people willing to enter the scene.
|
What I find interesting is that the article mentions MoW showing the author a skype chat log showing that Fuzer refuses to take a refund, but this is completely left out of their bland press release.
Krupowies showed ESFI a Skype log that had him offering Fuzer the refund of the second month’s fee, but that Fuzer declined to accept it.
Sure, this could be a result of terrible journalism and not MoW's fault, but this was their choice of "reputable" publisher in e-sports, right?
|
On September 13 2012 03:47 monkh wrote:
You totally did the right thing coming out with this. I'm surprised some of the players like Ret even signed a contract like that.
I am also surprised by this. Did anyone actually read the contract?
And why did they refuse to send a copy of the contract to a 3rd party for review? I'm no lawyer, but can't see why this would matter. If you are afraid of your contract terms getting out, it probably is a sketchy contract.
|
Why would you refuse to send your contract to anybody? If there were no hidden things and everything was correct, they should even be fine to send this contract to Fuzers grandmother.
|
On September 13 2012 14:39 warshop wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 14:37 NexCa wrote:
The thing is, in all that drama, MoW doesn't really answer to what Fuzer had to say... which is kinda sad It's been at most a day. Let's not judge too fast.
The truth doesn't take days and days to come out. Only well constructed lies.
|
On September 13 2012 14:55 graNite wrote:
Why would you refuse to send your contract to anybody? If there were no hidden things and everything was correct, they should even be fine to send this contract to Fuzers grandmother.
Haha Fuzers grandmother, she probably speaks finland only 
|
On September 13 2012 14:55 graNite wrote:
Why would you refuse to send your contract to anybody? If there were no hidden things and everything was correct, they should even be fine to send this contract to Fuzers grandmother.
Because they don't want other players finding out? You negotiate contracts with an individual on an individual basis. There's a reason most companies in the U.S. prohibit their employees from discussing pay; I believe disclosing pay is a valid (legal) reason for termination.
If one employee is performing better than another and you give him $5,000 more per year, and another employee finds out, he might be pissed, resentful, etc. or demand that he be compensated equally as much.
|
Vatican City State582 Posts
On September 13 2012 14:55 growlizing wrote:Show nested quote +On September 13 2012 03:47 monkh wrote:
You totally did the right thing coming out with this. I'm surprised some of the players like Ret even signed a contract like that. I am also surprised by this. Did anyone actually read the contract? And why did they refuse to send a copy of the contract to a 3rd party for review? I'm no lawyer, but can't see why this would matter. If you are afraid of your contract terms getting out, it probably is a sketchy contract.
As noted by someone else in the thread, every player received a different contract. This, to an extent, explains why some players didn't find anything wrong with their contracts while others did.
|
My favourite part of all of this is Desrow's comments;
"Nothing is perfect in life, but this house is almost perfect,” desRow told ESFI. “I enjoy the facilities, although the food is not the best for my situation and I wish it was more healthy, I have no regrets coming here.”
Desrow wants moar salad!! lolololol
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
